District 5 suit still undecided

Published: Wednesday, October 27, 1993 at 3:15 a.m.

Last Modified: Wednesday, October 27, 1993 at 12:00 a.m.

An NAACP lawyer and an attorney for Spartanburg School District 5 wouldn't say Tuesday whether the two sides expect to settle or go to trial in a single-member district lawsuit.

Lawyers for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, District 5, District 7, the County Board of Education and the County Election Commission met with U.S. District Court Judge Henry M. Herlong Jr. to discuss the status of the 2-year-old lawsuit.

The NAACP filed suit in 1991 to force the adoption of single-member voting districts, saying that at-large voting systems dilute the strength of black voters. William McBee Smith, a lawyer for the County Board and the Election Commission, has said he expects his clients to go to trial. The NAACP and District 7 have reached a settlement that will set up a mixture of at-large and single-member voting districts. That plan will be submitted for U.S. Justice Department approval. District 5 has approved a redistricting plan that the NAACP supports. But further work to fully resolve the lawsuit remains. A court scheduling order states that parties that have not settled must be ready for trial by the first of November. "We've had substantive discussions with the judge," said District 5 lawyer Mark Hayes as he left the two-hour status conference Tuesday. He declined to say whether District 5 and the NAACP are closer to fully resolving the lawsuit. "We are preparing for trial," he said, but he left room for a chance that a settlement still can come. "Our efforts have not completely been rejected by the NAACP." NAACP Assistant General Counsel Bruce K. Roberts, of Atlanta, was equally tight-lipped about how he expects the lawsuit to be worked out. The NAACP filed a motion last week asking that the Nov. 2 elections for defendants be delayed. Herlong has scheduled a hearing on that matter for 2 p.m. Thursday. Hayes filed an affidavit Tuesday stating that, despite the proposed redistricting plan, the NAACP has "rejected District 5's attempts to resolve the lawsuit." In an attached letter, which Hayes sent to Los Angeles NAACP lawyer Nyisha Shakur on Oct. 13, Hayes notes that he will not recommend that District 5 admit to a violation of the Voting Rights Act, and that the district will not "endorse the payment of attorney fees to plaintiffs." Actions brought under the federal Voting Rights Act allow plaintiffs to seek reimbursement for legal fees, but Roberts did not go into specifics about what the NAACP might do along those lines. Roberts said issues raised in the letters between Shakur and Hayes haven't "precluded any discussions." "We're still trying to resolve all of those issues," Roberts said. He would not comment on why the NAACP declined to accept a proposed dismissal order drafted by Hayes. Roberts said the NAACP moved to enjoin elections so close to election day because it was only recently that any parties began to reach any semblances of settlements. He said the motion to enjoin the elections was made in hopes of seeing fair voting plans put into place, not to be disruptive. Five District 7 candidates have hired Spartanburg lawyer Jim Ritchie to intervene in the matter in hopes of having the elections held on schedule. But Roberts said an election delay always has been a possibility. "It was well-known that this was a possibility, and no one can guarantee . . . there will be no disruption," he said.

<p> An NAACP lawyer and an attorney for Spartanburg School District 5 wouldn't say Tuesday whether the two sides expect to settle or go to trial in a single-member district lawsuit.</p><p>Lawyers for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, District 5, District 7, the County Board of Education and the County Election Commission met with U.S. District Court Judge Henry M. Herlong Jr. to discuss the status of the 2-year-old lawsuit.</p><p>The NAACP filed suit in 1991 to force the adoption of single-member voting districts, saying that at-large voting systems dilute the strength of black voters. William McBee Smith, a lawyer for the County Board and the Election Commission, has said he expects his clients to go to trial. The NAACP and District 7 have reached a settlement that will set up a mixture of at-large and single-member voting districts. That plan will be submitted for U.S. Justice Department approval. District 5 has approved a redistricting plan that the NAACP supports. But further work to fully resolve the lawsuit remains. A court scheduling order states that parties that have not settled must be ready for trial by the first of November. "We've had substantive discussions with the judge," said District 5 lawyer Mark Hayes as he left the two-hour status conference Tuesday. He declined to say whether District 5 and the NAACP are closer to fully resolving the lawsuit. "We are preparing for trial," he said, but he left room for a chance that a settlement still can come. "Our efforts have not completely been rejected by the NAACP." NAACP Assistant General Counsel Bruce K. Roberts, of Atlanta, was equally tight-lipped about how he expects the lawsuit to be worked out. The NAACP filed a motion last week asking that the Nov. 2 elections for defendants be delayed. Herlong has scheduled a hearing on that matter for 2 p.m. Thursday. Hayes filed an affidavit Tuesday stating that, despite the proposed redistricting plan, the NAACP has "rejected District 5's attempts to resolve the lawsuit." In an attached letter, which Hayes sent to Los Angeles NAACP lawyer Nyisha Shakur on Oct. 13, Hayes notes that he will not recommend that District 5 admit to a violation of the Voting Rights Act, and that the district will not "endorse the payment of attorney fees to plaintiffs." Actions brought under the federal Voting Rights Act allow plaintiffs to seek reimbursement for legal fees, but Roberts did not go into specifics about what the NAACP might do along those lines. Roberts said issues raised in the letters between Shakur and Hayes haven't "precluded any discussions." "We're still trying to resolve all of those issues," Roberts said. He would not comment on why the NAACP declined to accept a proposed dismissal order drafted by Hayes. Roberts said the NAACP moved to enjoin elections so close to election day because it was only recently that any parties began to reach any semblances of settlements. He said the motion to enjoin the elections was made in hopes of seeing fair voting plans put into place, not to be disruptive. Five District 7 candidates have hired Spartanburg lawyer Jim Ritchie to intervene in the matter in hopes of having the elections held on schedule. But Roberts said an election delay always has been a possibility. "It was well-known that this was a possibility, and no one can guarantee . . . there will be no disruption," he said.</p><p>STATUS.2</p>